Forums - Gaming Discussion - the sleeping dogs discussion thread!

answer these

1.was the game too easy?
2.how were the graphics?
3.was the story good?
4.combat?
5.completion?
6.total play time?
7.was car control good?
8.damn camera?
9.rating?
thats all



Around the Network
1.too easy!
2.good enough
3.yeah!
4.best combat evah!
5.bit over 90%
6.30+ hours
7.good
8.yes >:(
9.88/100

May i just... 8,5/10? :D

Nintendo 2018

English is not my native language.
mind said:
May i just... 8,5/10? :D



no.say them all



If Sleeping Dogs got a GTA level budget and they upped the animations and gameplay, GTA would be in trouble. I give it an 8.5. It has a large amount of potential that I dont even think Square Enix understands just yet. It has all the trappings of what would make a great next gen open world brawler, just like the potential InFamous has for open world super hero games.



Around the Network
aviggo77 said:

answer these

1.was the game too easy?
2.how were the graphics?
3.was the story good?
4.combat?
5.completion?
6.total play time?
7.was car control good?
8.damn camera?
9.rating?
thats all

1. No

2. Decent and refreshing. Not some boring Generic Town like GTA. Gonna praise the sound too.

3. The story was surprisingly good. Some twists and you really get invested into the characters. I wasn't really expecting any story.

4. Absolutely fun. Until they introduce guns.

5. well oer 90%

6. Don't know. Something around 30h?

7. Easy enough for me. Good variety in cars. Faster cars obviously harder to controll but still a lot of fun.

8. Didn't notice anything wrong with the camera.

9. 9



aviggo77 said:

answer these

1.was the game too easy? no
2.how were the graphics? on PC they were awesome.
3.was the story good? In a B movie sort of way, if you like hong kong cinema it's quite fun.
4.combat? Pretty good, way better than GTA, more hand to hand, The shooting was fun too with bullet time sequences, and jumping between cars, not as good as top tier TPS's though... 

5.completion? Yes
6.total play time? This was the bad part, there is much less content than GTA, and the DLC doesn't integrate well. It's got about 12-15 hours of interesting content imo)

7.was car control good? It was fun... It's kind of nonsensical though, ramming forward and things liek that.
8.damn camera? I didn't notice it
9.rating? 8/10 (I give GTA3 7, VC, 7.5, SA 9, GTAIV 7, and GTAV an 8.5)
thats all





aviggo77 said:

answer these

1.was the game too easy?
2.how were the graphics?
3.was the story good?
4.combat?
5.completion?
6.total play time?
7.was car control good?
8.damn camera?
9.rating?
thats all

1. I played through it blind.

2. Looks like an NES game. 

3. It was a total ripoff of the Smurfs.

4. I don't know what this word means. 

5. 0.7%, I quit after the first cutscene. 

6. Only lasted about 30 seconds, wait no that's my sex life. 

7. What cars?

8. Damn it to hell.

9. Knack/10 



Had a bet with eFKac on whether or not Valve will be at Sony's E3: I lost.

I went in skeptical since the GTA games do nothing for me but surprisingly I got hooked on Sleeping Dogs and played a whole Saturday, that happens very rarely. I don't even know what it is about it, if you take it apart there's nothing remarkable except the living breathing atmospheric Hong Kong. I guess this game was made with enthusiasm , love and attention to detail and that is always enough for a game to be great even if it's a copycat.

Around the Network
@fusioncode
that joke was hillariour 1 million/10